Tuesday, 30 May 2017

The
British general election is just over a week away, but so is everything else
that will happen on Thursday June 8th. The idea that this election
represents some vital decision that the British electorate might be allowed to
make is laughable. Democracy was emasculated some time ago, just within my own
lifetime. Re-reading Peter Obornes’s extraordinary book The Triumph of the Political Class merely reconfirms the fact that
there is no meaningful difference between the two parties contesting the
temporary stewardship of the keys to 10 Downing Street, nor is it wished by the
new establishment that there should be.

As
with the recent presidential election in the USA, the focus has not been on
reality but on tone, manner, past errors, ‘gaffes’. There is rarely any mention
of any of the most pressing problems facing a country, or union, which once
ruled over the majority of the globe, and on whose empire the sun famously
never set.

Of
course, where there is no genuine political disagreement, the media utilize all
their illusory sophistication to ensure that the public believes that there is.
I will return to Oborne’s decade-old classic in the future, but the theme of
the book is given in typically pithy style;

‘The
real divide in British public life is no longer between the main political
parties, but between the Political Class and the rest.’

No
matter how much the media portray Corbyn as either man of the people or
IRA-sympathising Communist, and no matter how they try to portray May as either
Evil Tory Scum™ or Thatcher 2.0, they are two wings of the same bird. Elect either
Tweedledum or Tweedledee, and you will receive

·Higher taxes.

·An increasingly
bloated public sector.

·Peak Scotland.

·An increasingly
inefficient and over-managed NHS.

·No change in
immigration, particularly of Muslims.

·A gradually
climbing national debt and deficit.

·The same biased,
lying media – the Lügenpresse.

·Increased
surveillance of dissenting individuals.

·A strengthening
of Oborne’s Political Class which, he writes, ‘has its emotional and moral
roots in 1960s student agitation’.

The
UK cannot produce a Donald Trump or even a Beppe Grillo to prevent any of this.
It can’t even muster a Wilders or a Le Pen. Farage was the equivalent of a
great bit of warm-up, knockabout, foot-of-the-bill entertainment at an English
seaside resort music hall, but UKIP were a one-trick pony, and Nuttall always
looks as though he is trying to sell you an unreliable car. The only point of
UKIP is to trickle-feed the Tory manifesto with half-baked pledges May will, in
any case, renege on the moment she gets back through the famous front door. So,
Britain will opt for more of the same, and the same is decline.

Back
in England a few years ago, someone gifted me a pair of brogue shoes made by
Loake, one of the most famous of English shoemakers, dating back to 1880. I
only date back to 1961 but, at my age, a curious thought strikes one on receipt
of a high-quality item such as these shoes; will they outlive me? Treat a pair
of shoes like that well, and there is no reason why I shouldn’t have them on in
my coffin. But the West? Europe? The UK? I don’t have the same confidence as I
do in the shoes.

As
Oborne makes clear, and as a seasoned lobby correspondent he would know, Britain
is run by a political class of technocrats. This self-elected aristocracy has
little or no interest in ordinary people except at polling time. There are
exceptions but, as Oborne makes clear, they may be serving MPs without being a bona fide part of the political class. I
vaguely knew one example not so long ago.

He
is the MP for the area in which he grew up, as was his father before him. He
has never, to my knowledge, been implicated in scandals, expenses or otherwise.
He struck me as an ordinary man, with an ordinary family, who felt he had a job
of work to do to represent the people of his home, whose comfortable Midlands
brogue he spoke. Which is why, unless you are a political obsessive, you will
never have heard of Mark Pawsey, MP for Rugby. He would regularly stop in the
lobby – not that lobby - to answer some piffling question I had about the
process of government, even when he was returning from his early-morning fitness
session, and probably would rather have been in the shower rather than telling
me about filibustering or gerrymandering.

And
Oborne is right. Mr. Pawsey, although a Conservative, is simply not of the political class. Oborne compares the Political
Class with the Establishment they usurped, and found that many of the latter ‘believed
that their motive for entering public life was public duty.’ This is not so
with the upstart arrivistes. The new
breed of politicians – with exceptions noted – are venal, self-serving narcissists
with contempt for ordinary people and reverence for the type of triangulation
and market-testing appropriate to the PR, media and advertising backgrounds
from which so many of them emerge.

The
incident which, for me, sums up the British political class occurred, I
believe, on Barack Obama’s first presidential visit to Britain. At the time, of
course, each and every European leader was desperate to be snapped in the same
frame as Obama, to touch the royal hem, but Brown was more desperate than most.
He had no mandate, and was to fail to take the risk necessary to get one. How
he must have wished some of Obama’s fairy-dust would fall on him!

As
Obama skipped up the steps to Number 10, he made an impulsive gesture which
comes so naturally to those expert in what the then-president calls ‘optics’.
He shook the hand of the policeman at the front door. Brown, following half a neck behind, looked at the policeman, who quite
naturally extended his hand once again. Brown looked at the man’s arm as though
it were a giant dog turd, and walked past him.

Of
course, part of the message here is not that there is no political class in the
USA. There surely is. It’s just that Obama does ‘optics’ better than a clunking
clod-hopper like Brown. It’s Hollywood versus an Ealing comedy. There was a
more recent ‘controversy’- which is what you get from the fourth estate now
instead of that old, fuddy-duddy, speaking-truth-to-power stuff (Yawn!) – involving
that meaningless piece of software known as Theresa May. She – or her policy Daleks
– came up with a little snack-sized quote for the press to Tweet; strong and
stable leadership. Teacups barely contained the resultant storms. Someone even
claimed to have found the phrase ‘strong and stable’ in Mein Kampf. But it wasn’t the two adjectives that interested me,
anodyne and pointless as their usage surely is. It is the idea which is now
commonplace that any kind of
leadership is required from a Prime Minister. You are a public servant, you witless ninny. Although the only party you
serve is the party of the first part. Yourself.

Tuesday, 23 May 2017

I
thought it would be football. The national religion, Association Football has
come a long way, and an attack on a Premier League Stadium would garner dream
publicity for the ISIS PR machine, a whole office of which is occupied by
Western non-Muslims. But it turns out to be pop music. I imagine security is
tighter at Old Trafford and Maine Road. I hadn’t heard of Ariana Grande – I’m
56, for Christ’s sake – but I don’t imagine she is worth as much as the
combined City and United squads. You have to look after the talent, including
shielding them from the more intrusive members of the press. Although it seems
the publication they may have to fear most is not some squalid red-top. It
might be the Koran.

One
of the most depressing aspects of this latest chapter in what Sadiq Khan might
call the everyday life of a big city is the media and political cycle
immediately afterwards. Hashtags. Vigils. Vigils with candles. Vigils without
candles. Rainbow avatars. Instructions to stand together, pray for Manchester,
and carry on as normal. Outrage at Katie Hopkins’s and Tommy Robinson’s Tweets.
Return fire as some journo or small-time politico jokes about the attack, or
otherwise makes light of it. Blame Islam! Don’t blame Islam! You’re an idiot!
No, you’re an idiot!

There
are only two important questions, as I see it, following every major attack
such as this one. Firstly, was the perpetrator an immigrant? Secondly, is this
the tipping-point?

The
Islam question is almost becoming secondary. Islam is surely woven into all of
this carnage, and the politicians who tell you that this has nothing to do with
Islam are simply trying to humiliate you by telling you something both you and
they know to be untrue.

The
next phase of return fire tends to be the question as to why this latest casino is not being condemned by the
Muslim community. Given the fanaticism of some Muslim communities, it may not
be quite as simple to denounce your co-religionists as those of us without
religion find it to condemn our fellows.

Warnings
against Islamophobia will follow as surely as summer follows spring. There will
be a few incidents, some real, some hoaxes, which will exercise and agitate the
myriad Muslim groups as well as their fellow-travellers in the SJW industry.

Then
the media reviewing will begin, and the same stale list of clichés will once
again parade like leprous catwalk models. An attack on British values will be
claimed, without the claimant considering that very young girls in doubtless sexualized
clothing paying a fortune to see a shallow pop star is not the greatest
advertisement for British values. Bland, anodyne pleas for community cohesion
will go up like the bleating of spring lambs. The blame will be laid at various
non-Muslim doorsteps. Trump’s wars. The far-Right. Not enough Muslim actors on
TV – I did not invent that last one. Everyone will be blamed but the vicious
anarcho-tyrannists who are using Islam and Muslims to further their authoritarian
aims.

And
the end result is that they now run our lives using their shock-troops to
enforce power randomly, without coherent pattern or form. I’ve been at the
scene of a major bomb-blast, one of the most infamous in British history. It is
terrifying. It is terroristic. After this latest, there will be more security,
you will be less free. There will be some police persecution of people who
merely write their opinions online. They will be less free. Increasingly,
parents will spare themselves a night of stress by not allowing their children
to attend these events. They will be less free. Perhaps once the mighty pop
music industry begins to take a hit, you might see some progress, but it will
be progress insofar as it will be more intimidating-looking policemen carrying
out more body searches is progress. The police won’t dare to touch young black
men to check if they have a knife, but they will look through your little
daughter’s make-up bag at a pop concert. And never forget that pop stars like
immigration, or say they do.

The
excellent Diana West makes a point of the high standard you would expect from
such a writer. She says that we in the West are effectively all now moderate
Muslims. There is much in this. Think of how Islam impacts on your life, if you
live in the UK. If you live in a city, you will see and hear mosques.
Increasingly, Muslim men pray in the street. In Sweden, girls are not leaving
home unaccompanied, in Germany none would dare attend an event alone, in Paris
there are no-go zones for women. This is all shariah-compliancy. And you are
co-erced into respecting all of this, and under no circumstances are you to criticise
it. You are moderate Muslims. You
might not go to mosque, but your children increasingly are.

Sadiq
Khan is a very devious Muslim who may well one day be Prime Minister. He has
said that Londoners ‘will see more police officers on the streets’ today. Paradoxically,
where this should comfort, it simply causes more distress. As we wait to
discover whether the latest suicide bomber was ‘known to the authorities’ those
same authorities swarm our streets uselessly, like extras in some
science-fiction movie.

Trump
has already been attacked by the Liberal-Left for referring to the terrorists
as ‘evil losers’. I would criticise his choice of phrase also, but for
different reasons. In what sense are the terrorists ‘losing’? I haven’t seen
Theresa May’s response, but it isn’t really necessary, is it? A scrabble of
vacuous nonsense with a lightly-secreted warning against tarnishing her beloved
Brand Islam.

As
for any notional tipping-point, what might it look like? Ordinary people don’t
have many options bar violence, and the Islam-friendly police ‘services’ will
be primed for that. A war on the streets between Muslims and kufr? Again, the police will only be
allowed to protect one side.

No,
after the dust settles it really will be business as usual. There will be
Muslims who despise the actions of this latest martyr because things are already going so well. The
media will still be in their ivory towers, beaming out at the peasants. The
Left will be planning their next march for free Queer Studies degrees. The
election will come and go, and the political class will be the victors.

And
a few families will have an empty place at table, if they were ever in the
habit of such a quaint ritual as the evening meal.

Sunday, 21 May 2017

Much
as I hate to blow my own trumpet, I recall my late father telling me that, if
you have a trumpet to blow, you may as well do so because no one else is going
to blow it for you. For several years, and spread over various weblogs, I have
been predicting that the elites would come for the internet. Not literally, of
course. It has at least three functions that serve our masters and,
increasingly, mistresses, if that is not too gender-specific for you.

Firstly,
of course, it allows them to communicate, both to themselves – although they
could easily produce a meta-net, and almost certainly have, although not one
Hillary Clinton could master – and to help disseminate the nonsense that passes
for media news. Also, it assists in keeping the plebs happy with pictures of
film stars, sportsball players’ slut girlfriends, and foods that make you
thinner.

Secondly,
it allows the masses to amuse themselves shopping for things they don’t need.
The economies of the West are sclerotic, and it is far easier to shop when you
don’t have to face the inconvenience – and occasionally the danger – of going
to the mall or shopping centre in person. The internet keeps money changing
hands, the lifeblood of any economy.

Thirdly
and most recently, it allows new crimes to be invented. This serves the dual
purpose of preventing genuine investigative thought, and making it possible to
improve the crime figures. Look how many people we have arrested! More crimes
solved than ever! It is, of course, easier to kick down the door of a keyboard
jockey’s mum’s house than it is to deal with rude boys with knives.

The
greatest trick ever played by the elites was convincing intelligent people that
acting against their own self-interest was somehow virtuous. Once this
looking-glass rule has been applied, the little people are expected to applaud
endless immigration, Islam, big government, ‘equality’, transgenderism, and a
host of other ruses and ploys and impediments to civilization as though they
were good and useful things. And not only is this welcoming applause sought by
the elites, it is expected and on its way to becoming mandatory. Eventually,
the gauleiters of the West will doubtless wish to see daily footage of ordinary
people applauding them manically and grinning psychotically, in the manner of
the cattle that pass for people in North Korea. And, even more than this
compulsory approval of toxic ideas, any dissent will be severely punished.

The
United Nations has long been a vacuous talking shop which increasingly exists
solely to criticise and demonise the white races. Now, however, it is chiming
with the censorious zeitgeist and
becoming involved in the greatest non-military battle of the 21st
century; the battle for free speech.

Now
that no day of the week seems to remain untouched by being designated the
International Day of Something or Other, so recently we had the International
Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Now, we know to a certainty –
for the Left have been good enough to tell us – that only white people can be
racially discriminatory because it is they who hold power. Incidentally, in
countries such as South Africa, where blacks demonstrably wield a terrible and
murderous form of power, are whites exempt from being racist?

Blacks
are, of course, phenomenally racist, and Muslims are xenophobic to an almost
comedic degree. But that is not important to the UN. What is important is that
whites keep their mouths shut. Let us peruse a key section of the web page
devoted to this day of days;

‘Racial and ethnic profiling is defined as “a
reliance by law enforcement, security and border control personnel on race,
colour, descent or national or ethnic origin as a basis for subjecting persons
to detailed searches, identity checks and investigations, or for determining
whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity,” according to a recent report to the Human Rights Council
by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance.’ (Italics added).

Thus, recently in London, so-called ‘stop and
search’ procedures have been all but abandoned by the Metropolitan police.
Predictably, there has been an orgy of knife murders. But at least the UN
‘Special Rapporteur’ can look on approvingly.

As with all these tawdry declarations, there is a
nicely vague area for increasingly authoritarian Western governments to
exploit. Above, it is the open-ended phrase ‘related intolerance’. What could
it possibly mean? I believe the UK’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, could be able
to enlighten us.

‘“We will consider what new criminal offences might need
to be created, and what new aggravated offences might need to be established,
to defeat the extremists,” the (Tory) manifesto reads.’

We all know what this means. It means we will give
Muslims their usual pass, with a few exceptions to create the Pepper’s Ghost of
impartiality, and go after whites who indulge in what a German politician
recently termed ‘wrong opinion.’

It is coming. Witness the Scotch man who is facing a year
in prison for making a rather strange video in which he teaches his pug dog to
be a Nazi. Look at Timothy Burton, a member of the political party Liberty GB. He
called a Muslim, Fayiz Mughal, a ‘mendacious grievance-mongering Taqiyya-artist
in chief’. Mughal is a big cog in the spurious set of liars known as Tell Mama.
They lie on a consistent basis about anti-Muslim ‘hate crimes’. For what I
think is a brilliant linguistic construction, Burton faces a few weeks in the
big house. Kevin Crehan, as we know, died in prison halfway through his
sentence of one year for putting bacon on a mosque door. No reason for death
has ever been given.

The Investigatory Powers Act can already track your
browsing history. It won’t really be used to see if Achmed has looked at
bomb-making sites though. It will be used to see if Dave from Burnley has read
The Daily Stormer. The BBC now possesses the power to inform your employer if
you post wrongthink. Tweets are investigated on a daily basis, while the
Rotherham child rapists are being set free from jail. This is all getting very
real, and very quickly.

Friday, 19 May 2017

Here
is the news. In the United States, a bear has been observed defecating in a
wooded area north of Oregon. In Vatican City in Italy, the Pope has given an
interview in which he professes to be of the Catholic faith. And in the United
Kingdom, Tommy Robinson has been arrested.

I
have written about Tommy – real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – many times before.
I have also mentioned myself being mysteriously fired from a job a few weeks
after receiving a phone call from the man himself. This time, he has been
arrested for the alleged crime of ‘attempted journalism’. If that is actually
an imprisonable offence, most of the British media should be in the clink.

This
is beyond pathetic. It’s now dangerous. It is not creeping Islamism that should
concern us here, but the rise of the British police state. Robinson has been
harassed for years now by the shariah-compliant police in the UK, and they will
not stop until he is dead. Lacking convenient access to the gallows, the
judicial system will simply incarcerate him in a Muslim-dominated prison – as
most UK prisons are, unless they are run by blacks – until a Mohammedan does
the job for them. He told me he expects to die in prison. He is a truly brave
man. All the while he is trying to expose Muslim rape gangs, the police are
trying equally hard to entice mentally ill ‘transgender’ people to join their
ranks. This is a disgusting world, mired in the excrement of cowardice and
appeasement.

In
a coincidental piece of timing, the BBC is airing a drama concerning something
Tommy’s EDL – you know, the fascists – were instrumental in exposing. The scandal
of the Muslim grooming gangs has been expertly detailed in Peter McLoughlin’s
book Easy Meat. If you wish to read
it, my review of the book is here.

The
BBC drama, however, makes no mention of the fact that the paedophile rapists
were, in almost each and every case, Muslims. Judge Gerald Clifford, who
sentenced the men portrayed in the upcoming drama, stated in his summing-up
that the paedophile rapists had treated the girls they abused ‘as though they
were worthless and beyond respect’. He added that ‘One of the factors leading
to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion.’ (Italics added).

However,
the BBC have other ideas. The writer of the series, Nicole Taylor, stated that
‘there was no religious basis for this’. Apparently, we now have to have our
opinions de judice delivered by BBC
scribblers rather than the judiciary, if the opinions of the latter are not to
the taste of Guardian readers. She
also claimed that she ‘didn’t want to give (the English Defence League) an
opportunity’. That would be the same English Defence League who, under the
leadership of Tommy Robinson, were instrumental in exposing the Muslim rape
gangs in the first place. McLoughlin is detailed and level-headed on this in
his book and he has never been sued or
prosecuted for one word he published. Did Nicole Taylor read it? Probably
not.

The
BBC has long disgusted me. This is simply a new twist on an old manoeuvre. They
make the series, and it looks as though they are facing up to some tough,
meat-hook realities. But they are not. The rapists were Muslims, but the
problem will be presented as one of male sexual aggression and patriarchy. These
paedophiles were Muslims. But the BBC says that the religion of the men was
irrelevant, a mere coincidental aside, petty marginalia. Let’s examine the
possibility that they are right.

Recall,
if you will, the scandals that ran through the Catholic church in relation to
paedophilia. Of course, the BBC at the time mentioned the fact that the priests
responsible for the abuse were Catholic at every possible opportunity. Religion
was, for them, clearly a factor in this sordid tale. What does this imply?
Presumably, that there is some sort of genetic or cultural predisposition among
Catholics to want to interfere sexually with young boys. But what does being a
Catholic priest guarantee you? A greatly enhanced level of immunity from
investigation. So, perhaps it is not the case that Catholic priests have a
disposition to abuse children because they are Catholic, but that they sought
out their position as Catholic priests because they wanted to abuse children,
and were cunning enough to realise that the priesthood would protect their
sordid hungers.

So,
with our Muslim paedophiles, is it a genetic, cultural or ideological
predisposition that motivates the rape gangs? Or have they simply chosen to act
out their disgusting desires because they have realised that Britain at present
makes them untouchable? Yes and no. A cursory reading of the Koran, and a
smattering of imams’ comments on these matters will tell you all you need to
know about Muslim attitudes to kufr girls.
You may now add this to the Muslim realisation that they will not be bothered
by the police, as the police are too busy investigating Katie Hopkins’s latest
Tweet. Muslims can get away with what they do because the police won’t fucking
touch them.

They’ll
touch Tommy Robinson, though. This time, for the ‘crime’ of recording some
Muslim paedophiles outside a court room, they arrested him at 4.30 in the
morning. When the police pay a visit to our Mohammedan cousins, they do so at a
respectable hour, never during Ramadan, never using police dogs – dogs are
unclean in Islam – and they have even removed their shoes to raid mosques. So,
where are we?

I’ll
tell you where. If you watch the video of Tommy’s banned speech at a York
University freedom of speech event, towards the end you will see an obnoxious
little prick dressed as a policeman. He and his cronies are in the process of
throwing Robinson out of a Cambridge pub where he had been watching football on
the TV with his wife and young family. Pay special attention to this little
bastard. His sneering, bullying body-language speaks of naked authoritarianism.
He makes Tommy’s little girls cry. He is aware that he cannot be stopped.

If
he was dealing with young blacks or, even more so, Muslims, the tone would have
been one of deference and apology. What this all adds up to is that, if you are
a white dissident in the UK, you are in real fucking trouble. The modern copper
wants to be an authoritarian bully-boy, or bully-girl, or bully-transgender or
queer or Dragon-person or whatever. They can’t do that with blacks, or women,
or gays, or Muslims. So, straight white boy, they are going to do it to you.
You are going to get the fucking lot.

They
don’t believe in what they are doing, the police. But they are going to do it
anyway. They disgust me. They disgust me because they took the chocolate bar,
they willfully ignored their duty to serve and protect the people in favour of
bullying the people who represent the least threat to society. And, of course,
they are now being sent after those who tell the truth.

There
is a dissident Right. It exists. It is, as the young people say, a thing.
Partly Alt. Right, partly Alt. Lite, partly old-school nationalism, partly
old-fashioned Conservatism, it exists primarily because it knows who its common
enemy is. It may well be doomed, because it exists largely online, and the
elites and their foot-soldiers will be marching up the stairs to take that away
from you very, very soon. Virtual space is very much like St. Augustine’s
description of where memories reside. A place which is as yet no place. We must
use it well, and while we can.

When
it comes to this dissident Right, you are either in or you are out. As far as I
am concerned, if you are politically engaged and you are not of this movement,
as loose as it is, then you are my enemy and you need to keep away from me. The
Left are the enemy now. Former goat-herders from the Hindu Kush, or Syrian
tailors, or Iraqi guys who scrub the rust off petrol cans are never going to be
my enemy because I don’t fucking know
any. The people I will fight – and I will, by any means necessary – are the
north London, Manhattan, Berlin, Gothenburg, Parisian Liberal-Left who want to
destroy the white male west just because they are annoyed, petulant, and keenly
aware of their inferiority. They are like a legion of Yoko Onos without their
Lennon. They can’t sing, but they want a job in the band. And I have met them
and I have seen their faces and I have heard what they have to say. And they
are the enemy.

But
my people, if such they are, are guilty too, and the mistake seems to me so
blindingly obvious that I wonder if I too may have made a mistaken allegiance.
I will give you an example.

I
have recently taken to watching videos by a Swede who goes by the handle of The
Angry Foreigner. You can find him easily enough. I rarely link. If you are
already reading this, you are probably not lazy. Except for the police officer
who is reading this, who almost certainly is. At least, intellectually lazy.
But with a nice pension pot to look forward to as a reward for lying.

The
Angry Foreigner is a Swede. He emigrated to Sweden as a young boy from Bosnia,
to escape the seemingly endless internecine warfare in that area of the world.
He is erudite, sarcastic and funny. He highlights, with impeccable journalistic
context and sources, the toxic and deleterious effect that Muslim immigration
has had on Sweden. However, and this is very much my point, he keeps describing
the importation of an antagonistic alien race as ‘crazy’, ‘mad’, and ‘insane’,
and various other terms describing the mentally unhinged.

If
you believe that the modern phalanx of governments across the Western world are
importing Islam because they are acting from a misguided sense of humanitarianism,
and that they cannot see the potential threat to their own cultures and
nation-states, and that this represents a level of mental imbalance and not
cold cunning, you are a part of the problem and nowhere close to being a part
of the solution.

Get
this straight in your heads. If you are white, indigenous Europeans, your
governments despise you. They wish two things upon you, such is their dissatisfaction
with your very existence and success. Firstly, they wish to goad and humiliate
you. Ideally, for them, white individuals will lose patience and begin openly
to criticize immigration, and even to take to the streets, thus allowing the
police to do something other than diversity training and transgender
recruitment programs, and persecute you. See the case of Tommy Robinson, below
and passim.

Secondly,
and as a more long-term program, they wish to replace you. The rate at which
Muslims have been shunted into countries whose infrastructure is already
creaking and groaning will have several effects. Wealthier European whites will
leave, taking their money and potential taxes with them. The infrastructural
creaking will get louder. Secondly, the demographics of countries will change,
first at a micro-level, but increasingly at a macro-level. Parts of European countries
are already Islamised, and this will continue. Thirdly, and as an essential
component of anarcho-tyranny, small-scale civil skirmishes will be allowed to
take place. These low-level, localized conflicts will gradually link arms.
Again, this will allow the police to realise their dream of acting like
Brownshirts or the Stern Gang, as well as further allowing governments to
accuse whites of racism.

The
possibility that this well-co-ordinated regime of malevolent social engineering
is just some manifestation of the law of unintended consequences attendant on
bureaucratic dumpkopfs is just not
feasible. Governments, and the sinister gauleiters
of the EU, know to a nicety where their immigration policies are leading.

In
addition, George Soros’s ground troops – aka NGOs – are ably assisting the
nihilistic influx of immigrants who neither wish to or are able to integrate
into what remains of Western society. And Soros may be a brutal and malevolent
man, but he and his people are far from stupid.

The
Angry Foreigner is erudite and intelligent. He has something of the stand-up
comedian about him, and is certainly more naturally amusing then Marcus
Brigstocke and the rest of the Leftist sock-puppets who pass for comedians in
the UK. His English is impeccable, as is the English of most young Swedes. It
is far more competent than the English you will hear spoken in most parts of
London.

What
I don’t understand is his insistence that immigration policy in Sweden is
somehow the result of incompetence. As I have written many times, this is not
incompetence. This is what a certain type of competence looks like.

And,
whitey, it is not a competence that wishes you well. Soon it will be time
either to pack up or put up. You will either be required to have bigger balls,
or you will lose them entirely.

Saturday, 13 May 2017

I
like to laugh. It is a legacy from my late father. He was a very funny man who
loved to laugh and loved to make others laugh. It is one of the very few things
I miss about London, my small coterie of friends with whom I could sit in a pub
and roar with laughter. Here, it is mostly Americans who, like Germans, mistake
a sense of humour for laughing loudly at their own attempted jokes.

So
it is that I find myself grazing on the parched arable of Twitter on the
lookout for humorous exchanges and, wherever possible, trying to provide a
smile for others. I managed this feat with the following Tweet;

I
know. I missed my calling as a stand-up comic. It stirred up a pleasurable
amount of mirth among my Twitter chums, but afterwards a deeper relevance
seemed to want to pull on my coat about something…

It
is difficult to know just where to begin with transgenderism and its various
offshoots, sprouting as they are like mushrooms in a dewy dawn. So, let us look
at some antecedents. We are told by the Left - and we will be guided
Virgil-like by them here - that race is a social construct. Thus, Rachel
Dolazel and Shaun King, two white people with white parents, can elect to be
black and we must accept that they are.

So,
it’s basically swapsies. This ability to trade in one identity for another, of
course, has as its precedent the ability of individuals to convert to another
religion from their previous set of beliefs. This at least has the merit of
being feasible in the real world, the one we live in despite being told we do
not. The highest profile type of conversion, in the West, is from Christianity
to Islam.

Now,
I have often thought of reciting the shahada,
one of the five Islamic pillars of faith, and the stating of which converts
the speaker into one of the Islamic faith. Should I ever have to tangle with
the UK police, it would be better to have them treat me as a Muslim. This is a
simple truth that simply cannot be denied. The UK police are as petrified of
having to deal with Muslims as they are of having to deal with young black men.
It is a potential career-finisher.

But
wait. Surely if I recite the shahada and
also self-identify as black, it’s a double-whammy! Plod wouldn’t touch you with
a shitty stick! And hang on a sec, a black Muslim woman would be as untouchable
as the love-child of a Hindu dalit and
Elliot Ness! That, as football commentators say, is the hat-trick!

Why
not? If men can now compete with women on the sporting field, if men can now
use women’s toilets because they claim to be one themselves, if whites can be
blacks and blacks can be Chinese and Aborigines can become Ashkenazi Jews, why
can’t I become Fatima M’Bumbo al-coholic?

This
is the rabbit hole down which the Left are forcing the West, and the wonderland
into which it leads is surely symptomatic of the irreversible decline of that
West. There is a poignant moment in the iconic film Withnail & I in which drug-dealer Danny describes the end of
the 1960s – as Woodstock was eclipsed by Altamont – as follows; “They’re
selling hippy wigs in Woolworth’s.” Funny and sad at the same time, we have
gone one better in 2017.

A
British police force is issuing new headgear to their officers and PCSOs
(Police Community Support Officers). A nod towards terrorism and rocketing
knife crime, perhaps? Let’s ask a spokesperson for Northamptonshire Police
Force;

‘Not
only will the new bump caps offer a better level of protection, the new
headgear means that no longer will male and female officers be issued different
headgear with varying safety ratings simply on the basis of gender.

Engagement
has also shown that having to choose gender-based headgear is a barrier to the
non-binary transgender community joining the police force.’

You
can imagine the secret thoughts of the writer of that last sentence as being
something along the lines of; Fuck right off out of it. I imagine a lot of
people in authority - coppers, politicians, journalists, employers, teachers - are
having to guard their secret thoughts about transgenderism in order to protect
their livelihoods. And they have the new Left to thank for that.

If
everything is a social construct, as the academic Leftist screwheads claim (but
don’t believe), then anyone can be anything. There is no theoretical limit
point to what you can become. Added to this, particularly for the young, there
is the bonus that it brings you attention and may even – gasp! – get you into
the Valhalla of reality television.

An
interesting flashpoint will come when politicians are forced to recite the
transgender version of the shahada, and
state that they fully support the belief that women can become men and men
women. This is not going to fly with the Muslim voting bloc, no mater how much taqiyya the likes of Sadiq Khan throw
into the mix. Muslims understand when other Muslims lie to the kufr. It is for the cause. But when
non-Muslims start defending transsexuals, expect sparks to fly.

Of
course, it gives celebrities something to bleat about in their self-righteous
hot-tub of virtue. Talentless punk Emma Watson is already whining about
gender-neutral roles. And, because she is famous for playing someone in the
film rendition of a crap series of children’s novels, the Liberal media echo
chamber will sit up and pant at her driveling outpourings. Where will it all
end? Because it will end.

Wednesday, 10 May 2017

As
is well known to anyone who tangles with the progressive, Millennial Left, the
word ‘fascist’ tends to pop out of their mouths in the manner of one of those
1970s dolls whose string you pulled to activate a word or phrase. So it was on
Twitter after Le Pen’s defeat in the French presidential election.

One
gentleman named Ian Dunt (@IanDunt), whose name could well be Cockney rhyming
slang, was of the opinion that it was an excellent morning on Monday because of
the thought of ‘all those fascists crying into their breakfasts’. I asked him
why Le Pen supporters were ‘fascists’ and, while he did not reply, another
virtual SJW known as ‘Frenchie’ (@Frenchie2585) was kind enough to provide
illumination in the darkness;

‘MLP
is a fascist, anyone voting for her is voting for a fascist, therefore
supporting fascism, hence risking being called fascist themselves.’

I
think that what strikes one first is the assured tone, as though the writer
were using an Aristotelean syllogism with all the confidence and precision of
the seasoned logician. Indeed, I replied;

‘That
is one of the most amazing Tweets ever. Algebraically, it reads A=A. A=B. B=C.
Therefore A=C. No value is given for A, B or C.’

Orwell
famously observed that the word ‘fascism’ had become ‘almost entirely
meaningless’, and went on to comment on its usage using the dry humour endemic to
his work and very much under-appreciated;

Women.
Got to laugh at that one. You got that right, George. But by now we are
familiar with the debased coinage of the word, as though a literal coin has
been used so often and sat and jingled in so many pockets that all its
distinguishing marks have been worn away, leaving just a smooth, featureless
disc with no indication of value.

But
the Right, even the Alt. Right, are guilty of the same foolishness. Thus,
Antifa are the ‘real fascists’, the Left are the ‘real fascists’, Black Lives Matter
are the ‘real fascists’. On and on and on goes the dance, the dancers twirling
ever more furiously.

The
charge of fascism is vague, then, and seems to be a form of ‘Boo-Hooray
Theory’, this being the reductive version of the ethico-linguistic emotivism philosophy
advanced by A J Ayer and J L Austin which states that all speech acts reduce to
a basic approval or disapproval of the object of the utterance.

There
doesn’t seem much to be gained by pointing out that actual, historical fascism
was a very limited, localised term originating with Mussolini and the fasces, the martial-agricultural emblem
which mutated into the swastika. The word has since acquired the novel new power
we know all too well, as it is flung
around like a madman’s excrement.

Accusations
of fascism also have to do with one of the emergent phrases from the last
decade of conflict between, for want of better terms, Left and Right;
Virtue-signalling.

Those
who inhabit the tenements of the Millennial Left, as well as those tenured
Leftists in the turreted towers of the Western media, despise the phrase, both
because they know it is aimed exclusively at them by their enemies and, I
suspect, because they subconsciously know it to be accurate. This type of moral
preening is best exemplified by Polly Toynbee’s infamous comment, forged in the
white heat of an upper-middle-class literary festival, that Left-wingers –
specifically Polly’s friends - are ‘just better people’ than Right-wingers. I
am sure she came to that incisive conclusion while at her ease with a bottle of
something sensational on the terrazza of
her Tuscan villa.

Cognitive
psychologists often use the term ‘self-serving bias’. This is the tendency of
individuals to attribute positive attributes to themselves and, in order to
achieve this, to attribute negative attributes to others. This, of course, is
at the heart of virtue-signalling. I am good because you are bad, a dialectic
of retroactive self-esteem. When I see virtue-signalling – and it is hard to
avoid – I am reminded of a scene I once saw in an English supermarket.

A
small child was having one of those all-singing, all-dancing temper tantrums,
rolling on the floor and bashing his little balled fists on the ground while he
screamed and cried. We’ve all seen it. What was interesting was two or three
other small children looking on, standing next to their parents and looking
extra-angelic as they glanced up at Mummy or Daddy as if to say; So, do you see
how good I am? Now, about that chocolate or toy…

I
recognise the desire to be liked myself. It is a suggestion from Freudian
analysis that when parents split up and divorce – as mine did when I was 17 –
the oldest child – which I am – feels a subliminal level of guilt, as though
the marital failure were their fault. For years after, I was aware of an
aggravated need to be liked by my classmates. It lasted for a good deal of my
adult life, too. Now, I sometimes wonder if I have swung to the other pole, and
actively attempt to be disliked. Certainly, I have ten times as many enemies in
London as I have friends. But I digress.

The
one statement that is guaranteed to produce a dissonant and enraged chorus of
‘fascist!’ is that you wish to see less immigration, particularly from Muslim
countries. This is the thread that unites, for example, Donald Trump, Nigel
Farage, Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen. Wishing to protect your country’s
sovereignty, integrity, borders and culture is thus equated with a Hitlerian
animus.

This
has one glaringly obvious conclusion; Most white people in the Western world
are fascists. It is common knowledge that the vast majority of people – ie.
everyone bar the elites, Millennials and Muslims, backed by the media – wish to
see fewer, if any, Islamic imports. Blacks are starting to realise the
implications of another victimhood bloc taking their turf and hanging their
Nikes off the local telephone wires. And so we are reaching the point at which
the word ‘fascist’ will lose not simply its descriptive function, but that loss
will be closely followed by that of its pejorative function.

Monday, 8 May 2017

Well,
France, it looks like goodbye rather than au
revoir. The conventional wisdom on the Right and Alt. Right is that five years
of Macron will come so close to destroying France that Le Pen will stroll into
power in 2022. I’m not so sure.

It
was too much to expect a Brexit/Trump/Le Pen hat-trick. The globalists are too
strong for that. But while the Brexit debate centred around the state’s
so-called Project Fear, and the American election further exposed the
globalist, Leftist media and deep state propaganda machine, the French election
was breathtaking in its level of bias.

The
BBC will, of course, be in estrus about
Macron. They collectively orgasmed when Hollande won last time around, and he
was an utter failure even by European standards. Has any other politician ever
had a 4% approval rating? But if Socialism wins, the BBC are a happy bunch of
quasi-Communists. I’ve met people who worked for the BBC. They have a sort of
existential aroma about them, like entering a bedroom in which a beer-drinking
man has farted repeatedly over a long period of time. You feel you need a scalding
shower after talking to them.

Jeremy
Corbyn has Tweeted his delight that Macron defeated Le Pen’s ‘politics of hate’,
seemingly unaware that his second-in-command hates white people, although that
is not counted as hatred for reasons discussed in the post below. With this one
Tweet, Corbyn shows the total, hypocritical idiocy of the Left.

Another
curio in the endless Curiosity Shoppe of Leftist clownthink is that they are
supposed to hate globalist bankers, yet they all wet their knickers when France
elects one. Like Bertie Wooster, one simply shakes one’s head and passes on.

A
further aspect of Macron’s rise to power seems curious until you look beneath
the surface, as one always must in these treacherous times. It seems to be
common knowledge in France that he is gay. What is odd is that he has covered
up this fact, even going so far as to marry a woman who looks like Iggy Pop
after a failed facelift. And yet, in the Left-Liberal-dominated times, why
would anyone hide the fact that they are gay? I worked with a homosexual in my
last job. He was as gay as a yellow feather-duster, and yet pretended
otherwise. He used to feign, through frostily gritted teeth, that he was
lovestruck over a female estate agent who often visited our place of work. It
was about as convincing as Hillary Clinton in leather at a dyke conference.
That actually happened, by the way. And then he would literally sigh when some
classy guy walked past.

But,
surely, these must be the most auspicious times to be what we used to call, as
children, a wooly-woofter since Socrates and his Greek chums invented bumming
in the first place. Gay Pride events are more or less compulsory, gays fill the
TV schedules, and woe betide the politician who wafts even the vaguest scent of
homophobia. Old Traumavillians, of course, know full well that I despise
homophobia, which actually exists whereas Islamophobia and anti-black racism
generally do not, and is widely practiced by both Muslims and blacks. My
colourful language is humour, that endangered species. But to return to my
point. Like the cleaner I used to work with, why does Macron feel the need to
hide his sexuality? Then the shekel dropped…

He
needs the Muslim bloc vote. The best way to haemorrhage Mohammedan votes is to
cozy up to the gay community. And, of course, he is going to be reinforcing
that bloc, claiming to wish to import 200,000 more immigrants per year for the
duration of his tenure. They will not be Buddhists, Amish or Zoroastrians.

And
here is the unintended consequence for that particular little demographic
manoeuvre. As I had to explain patiently to a gay guy on Facebook – now a
bouncy castle for Leftist dullards – Muslims really don’t like homosexuality.
He had stated that Chechnya was rounding up gays and putting them in camps,
appropriately enough. It seemed that, like a lot of Americans I meet, he had
the vague idea that the USSR still exists, and that Putin was at the bottom, so
to speak, of this gay gulag. I pointed out to him that, in fact, Putin had
fought Chechnya and, more importantly, that country is 95% Muslim. I went on to
inform him of Muslim homophobia, but he seemed keen to tell me about how white
Christians in the USA, apparently, lynch gays. I then appraised him of the
shariah no-go zones of London, where he and his boyfriend would likely be
beaten up if they hold hands therein. He continued to resist the obvious truth.

I
was in Paris at the end of November, 2015, two weeks after the Bataclan
massacre. I met my girlfriend for the first time on the Eurostar, and she tells
me something I knew anyway. She thought I looked gay. And, gentle reader,
looking at photos of that week, I did indeed look as camp as Christmas. Linen
suit, checked waistcoat, highly polished brogue boots, clipped moustache, Nazi
haircut. Yup, camp as a row of boy scout tents.

Travelling
from Gare du Nord to my Air BnB, I inadvertently wandered into a Muslim area. I
was, in half an hour, aggressively denied entrance to a bar, ripped off
blatantly in another, and further scammed by a Muslima taxi driver. At least
women can still drive there, if they are Mohammedan.

What
really lingers in the memory, apart from the smell of Muslim parts of Paris, are
the open looks of hostility I received from Muslims I passed in the street. Let
me tell you something. Muslims really, really don’t like homosexuals. Now there
is a closeted gay guy in power who wants to import more of them, it is going to
get very nasty for Pierre et Pierre in the city of love.

Curiously,
the gay guy I used to work with went to Paris four times a year. He was
actually very cultured. I imagine him sitting at an effete Parisian café,
reading Proust in the original and sipping coffee from a dainty little cup. As
the next five years roll slowly by, his range of options as a boulevardier will gradually dwindle. Gay
Paree. For now.

Saturday, 6 May 2017

Much
will have been written about Diane Abbott’s interview with Nick Ferrari. The
curious thing that struck me on listening and re-listening to it is that I
strongly suspect she was drunk. Not smashed, mind, but almost certainly a
couple in, or perhaps still toasted from the night before. Allegedly, she goes
missing from time to time with ‘migraine’. I’ve never heard it called that
before. Those who know me well will attest that I know whereof I speak, and
there was a definite set of indicators which spoke powerfully of an intense
lobbying effort from what a friend of mine calls ‘Dame Boozy-Woozy’.

Now,
Ferrari’s show used to run between 7am and, I think, 10am, Monday to Friday,
and I assume it still does. I have spoken to Ferrari on three occasions. My
mother has engaged the great man so many times that they are on first-name
terms. He is an amiable man, able to laugh at himself – unlike his colleague
James O’Brien, a public school-educated Marxist – and a wily and able radio
interviewer.

If
you have not yet heard the interview, treat yourself. Abbott treats mathematics
with all the dexterity of a chimp with a Rubik’s Cube. She does not know what
she is saying, and papers can clearly be heard rustling as she fumbles for a
way out. Watch it on YouTube, because Ferrari’s face is a treat, a visual
symphony of disbelief. He is thinking what every British person is, or ought to
be, thinking; If Labour win, this creature will be Home Secretary.

Abbott
is a career racist and, if you would like to be employed in a similar position,
white people need not apply. There is no money in it for us as we do the work
anyway on a voluntary basis. It’s a little like the gag about dogs.

Q:
What does a dog do on his day off?

A:
Well, he doesn’t sleep. That’s his job.

There
is no money in racism for whites. Well, except the ones who are black stooges.
But, for someone like Abbott, it could take you all the way to one of the
land’s highest offices. And money? You got it, ma bitch!

The
picture that heads this piece is a painting of Abbott. It cost, apparently, over
ten thousand pounds. I wonder if you can guess who paid for that. Her comments
on race are, I would imagine, familiar to most of you. She has claimed – and
this is in the public domain – that the problem with the UK is not immigration,
it is white people. Of course, these comments cannot be deemed racist, as
Abbott is black, and blacks cannot be racist, as they lack power. Thus spake
the Left. Should she become Home Secretary, and thus gain power, would her
comments then become racist? It is a conundrum worthy of Zeno.

If
she were Home Secretary, would it be the first time in British history that a
Prime Minister had previously fucked his Home Secretary? Apparently, Corbyn
used to parade Abbott in front of his friends in a sort of tribal
virtue-signalling ritual. I’ve known white guys like that. Look at me. I’ve got a black girlfriend. Have you any idea how good that makes me? I personally have had
several black girlfriends and it does not make me good – no power on earth
could do that – but it made me aware of one thing. With each and every one of
them, if I closed my eyes while they were talking, they sounded white.

Diane
Abbott is against grammar schools and, indeed, any kind of selective education.
Except, perforce, for her own child, who goes to an expensive private school masquerading
as a comprehensive. She defended her choice of the ten thousand pounds a year
school – you could buy a painting for that - by stating that ‘West Indian mums
will go to the wall for their children’. Unless there is an Islington wine bar
– she likes the odd bot. of something sensational, allegedly – called The Wall,
I fail to see what she means.

Abbott,
who as stated would be Home Secretary if Labour win the upcoming general
election, is the worst type of race-baiter. She immediately assumed that the
Croydon attack on a Kurdish immigrant was the work of whites. If it was, and
there were certainly whites involved, they were whites actively participating
in the black experience. She went very quiet when the first photographs of
black suspects appeared. She is a known acquaintance of a Mr. Lee Jasper, a
race-baiter who once stated that the reason young black men are
disproportionately represented in gun crime figures in London is due to – wait
for it, wait for it – white racism. Abbott herself said, in a throwaway line on
the Ferrari interview, that it was a shame young men felt they needed to carry
knives to protect themselves. This is the kind of horse-shit that leads to the
deaths of the young black men she claims to champion.

It
is easy to be glib about Abbott, but there is deeper import here. She is a
talentless, bigoted, careerist race-baiter with no more ability than the kind
of black council time-wasters that have made my mother’s life a misery in the
past, and whose careers have been boosted by their racist appointment. The
problem is this. Black people are being given jobs, at the highest level, which
many of them are not up to. If you feel you need some token blacks on your
Shadow Cabinet, like they used to do in 70s BBC dramas, why not try Dr. Tony
Sewell? More or less called an Uncle Tom, or house nigger, by the London
blackerati and the whites who adore them, Sewell was cast into the wilderness
for saying controversial things such as that blacks need to take on a level of
responsibility for their destinies instead of blaming Whitey. But no. Instead,
we get Abbott.

There
is a General Election looming in the UK which the party fallaciously calling
themselves Conservative look set to win. A talented, two-fisted, capable opposition
is necessary for the functioning of any government. The office of Home
Secretary is one of the highest in the land, and its shadow is concomitantly
important. It should not be given to a moron simply because she is a black
woman. Labour needs to look further than Islington harpies and Guardian readership. This woman is a
fool, and the UK already has far too many of those.